Of course, rabid foam is dripping off the jaws of many of those talking about the Middle-East. Not that there's anything wrong with rabid people (or
dogs), so please don't suicide bomb my house for blasphemy or singing to Western music. But because of the crazed and anti-rational nature of some
of the comments, I'm being pushed to drastic conclusions.

Everybody says they want peace and an acceptance of the other parties in the area, except for the Islamic leaders that don't say that, but leave them
aside for the moment. How do we get the opposing parties to talk to each other at a peace table? I know, have one side call the other genocidal,
NAZI dogs, filled with blood lust. I remember seeing that on Page 92 of Dale Carnegie's great book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People."
Later on in the book, one can learn about the relaxed atmosphere caused by saying things as mentioned in this description of the Hamas Charter:

The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state
in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories, and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.

So, now that everybody is relaxed and ready to talk, let's find a solution.

Of course, the solution can't be based on a cease fire, Hamas treats cease fires with a 50-50 attitude lately. But maybe we can find a place where
Hamas and Israel can reach an agreement. Here's part of an article from 2012:

Khaled Meshal is the top political leader of Hamas, and entered Gaza for the first time this weekend. Here are some of his remarks to a mass rally
celebrating Hamas’s 25th anniversary:

"Palestine, from the river to the sea, from north to south, is our land. Not an inch of it can be conceded. We cannot recognize the legitimacy of
Israel’s occupation of Palestine. There is no legitimacy to occupation, and therefore no legitimacy for Israel, no matter how long it will take.
Liberating Palestine, all of Palestine, is a duty, a right and a goal….we will liberate [Jerusalem] inch by inch, stone by stone, Islamic and
Christian holy places. Israel has no right in Jerusalem…."

As to the recent UN vote giving “Palestine” the status of “non-member state,” Meshal said:

"Liberation first, then the state. The real state is the product of liberation, not the product of negotiations. Holy war and armed resistance are
the real and right path to liberation and recovery of rights."

So, we now know that Hamas wants the elimination of Israel. According to some polls, a majority of Israelis do not want to be eliminated. But they
might not represent the real Israel, the poll may just have focused on the "Bitter Clingers." PressTV, Al-Jazeera, and RT, all assure us that the
true Israelis want to be eliminated, so Hamas has a duty to do so as quickly and as completely as possible.

But assume for a moment, that by some strange twist of fate the Israeli government doesn't want their country to be eliminated. Is the best course
of action to send Hamas a letter asking them not to? I'm surprised the Israelis haven't thought of that.

While Israel is trying to figure out how not to become a "former" country, Hamas gets the world to yell about the fiendish blockade Israel has
imposed which prevents them from getting concrete for hospital and school construction. Israel is denounced as war mongers when they suggest that
Hamas use some of the concrete lining the dozens of tunnels coming out in Israeli territory, or the hundreds of tunnels coming out in Egypt.

Hamas is also trying to figure out a possible plan for peace. They decide that they haven't reached out to the average Israeli citizen to make their
case. Another problem Hamas believes exists is that Israeli citizens don't get sufficient opportunity to discuss these issues among themselves.

So in the interest of explaining their side of the story, they reach out to Israeli citizens day after day, and all throughout Israel, now that they
have better means to "Reach out and touch someone." While half of Israel's population is hiding out in shelters, they have the opportunity to
discuss Hamas' political points and come to conclusions.

Speaking of shelters, Hamas has done a lot of digging underground. It's really too bad that some one spilled coffee on their plans to build shelters
for their people. Oh, well, you can't make martyrs without cracking a few skulls. Besides, they make good publicity photos, which the world will
show over and over. It's no problem if they run out of pictures, Hamas has discovered how to create fake victim photos. They're not very
believable, but their good enough to cause some more emotional outrage.

Israel, due to it's neo-fascist, Black and White thinking, accepts only two possibilities in their narrow minded way, stop Hamas, or don't stop
Hamas. Those war mongers somehow think that stopping Hamas is a good idea. But the world knows better. If Israel does more than any other army in
history to protect civilians in an urban area under attack, it proves that their intent is to kill kids. It's a shame that those 16 year old
"kids" don't get a chance to gently put down their rifles, the stocks get scratched when they're dropped.

Since Israel is widely condemned for attempting to protect civilians, maybe the world is right and Israel is doing it all wrong. If they
didn't try to protect civilians, maybe that would receive approval.

Oh, on a serious note? Hamas has admitted to firing three rockets at Dimona, the site of Israel's nuclear reactor. Iron Dome got one, the other two
missed. Consider, for a moment, a Fukushima in Israel. I don't suppose Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Iran,and Syria would be too happy if radiation started
coming their way.

Iran, by the way, is one of Hamas' great supporters and funders. How far is Iran from getting a short-range nuke? When they get one, might they
share with Hamas?

Well, what solution do these attempts at peace (also known as conquest) lead us to? This is the unhappy conclusion I need to be dissuaded from. The
only thing I can see is that Hamas must be completely destroyed as a threat. Move them to Antarctica, spray them all with pig fat, or saddest, but
most reasonable of all, kill them. Kill them quickly and completely.

I don't want to discuss what Emir so and so said to Rabbi whosis at the end of the 1800s. It makes no real, practical sense, to discuss 1948 or
1967, or whether the Jews aren't really Jews, but displaced Reptillians. The question is what to do with a terror organization that gives every
appearance of wanting to go to paradise through committing "Suicide by IDF."

I suspect this thread will suffer numerous attacks to divert it to some discussion about "well, they stole it from us by bribing the UN." Or,
"Look, they ignored a UN resolution." (Try to find even one resolution directed against Palestine. They must be perfect.)

If you can't separate the sarcasm from the rest of the thread, ask me.

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. If you don't understand what I've written ( a very real possibility), just offer a way to guarantee Israel's safety with more than another
Hamas promise.

I've just tried to stay mostly out of it and stay diplomatic when I can't, but I confess to a bit of bias. I know, I know, I'm a very evil person,
but I dated an Israeli for a time in college. I think I've been forever tainted by that experience, infected with this silly idea that somehow ...
somehow who's been born there and lived there and spent three years in compulsory service there and had a sister just getting ready to do her
three-year IDF stint, might regard that place as home and feel inclined to fight for it just like anyone who lives in their country of origin
would?

And even worse, his family was from Tel Aviv, so I constantly remember them when I hear about rockets there which is nearly all the time.

Wow Charles, so you couldn't have picked an easier topic for a relaxing evening eh?

just offer a way to guarantee Israel's safety with more than another Hamas promise.

I've been pretty hard on Israel for the sheer destruction of civilians but acknowledge that Hamas is as much a problem in this mess as anything
(probably more.) The only way I see any solution is the end of Hamas AND the end of the Zionists. Maybe that way the regular Israelis and Palestinians
could actually live side by side.

Then stop with the Israeli settlements in the West Bank at least as a start. Not gonna happen though, I think this is going to end in genocide which
will solve the problem from Israel's point of view.

While I agree all that needs to happen it will have little or no impact on Hamas actions. They've made their position pretty clear in regards to
Israel. They want all the Jews destroyed or driven out of Israel, their preference is destroyed.

Thanks for the video. I truly, honestly, wish that people could talk this out. Almost all of the world believes that, from empty headed protesters
to foreign affairs specialists.

Unfortunately, that's as far as people go. They don't ask what happens if negotiations don't work. I'm hoping someone can show me a way to peace
in this particular situation. If war is inevitable, however, I'm on Israel's side.

I want universal peace. But i think much more war and violence is to come.

I'm anti violence, extremely hard core. To where i don't even know if i saw all my allies being slaughtered around me, if i could even fight back.
Because i do not wish to inflict any sorts of harm to anyone.

Luckily i can say I've never been in that sort of situation, so who knows what I would do under the circumstances.

I've shot a few guns before, nothing powerful at all. And i hope I never have to shoot another one again. I just wanted to add one of the videos that
i think respectfully represent ATS as a whole:

Oh, Demus, I do wish you had read my OP. But perhaps it's my fault for not making it clear.

A nation has a duty to insure it's survival. What can Israel do to guarantee it's survival as the State of Israel?

By listing a bunch of concessions then saying when you've conceded all that, we'll ask for more, you've missed the point of the thread and offered
a completely unworkable position. It is, as American politicians say "Dead on Arrival." It's a proposal not meant to be taken seriously, but
thrown out for propaganda value.

That's why I put it in Rant, instead of a couple of other possible forums. I'm tired of people shouting, shooting, and screaming then saying it's
the other side's fault, so the war should continue. I'm upset by the close mindedness of some posters. That's why I chose my title.

I want to get to peace, but if we can't do it by talk, we have to pick another, uglier method.

Although the issue is to complex for me to even start forming an opinion about who is right and who is wrong I may have a solution to this
situation.

You see I am somewhat of an expert when it comes to resolving crisis situations and restoring order where chaos rules. The warzone that I call
"home" has four kids running around in it and they also seem to have recurring issues when it comes to sharing.

The whole issue of who started it and who is to blame is is ridiculous. Where two fight, two are to blame. So I would suggest that if Israel and
Palestine can't play nice, they both pack up their stuff and leave the region. We could turn the place into the World's largest waterslide
amusement park and be done with it.

And may I congratulate you. This is the first bit of "out of the box" thinking that doesn't lead to lots of people getting destroyed that I've
seen.

Have the UN declare the entire area some form of historic reserve and kick everybody out. Wonderful!

Then we run into some questions. (I hate this part) What happens to Jerusalem? I suspect some are going to be perturbed at losing it. How to we
keep people out? The UN is notoriously ineffective at anything.

Maybe we can come up with a multi-national force? How do we compensate Israel? They would lose a ton more than the Palestinains would.

Where would the Jews go? if they settle in a country, that country instantly becomes an Al-qaeda target. Maybe we can create a new country from bits
of other countries? Nah. Last time we tried that, Israel was attacked the next day.

But I really like your idea. As I say, it's something different anyway. It's a piece of gold which isn't found all that often here. I love learning
new things and having my mind stretched. Thanks bunches.

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. By the way, I don't want to discuss who is to blame either. It doesn't help find a solution, it just increases the yelling.

By listing a bunch of concessions then saying when you've conceded all that, we'll ask for more, you've missed the point of the thread and offered
a completely unworkable position.

did I missed the point?

you are talking about survival of a Nation and I understand that from that point of view but are you taking away right of another Nation to
survive?

I don't agree or promote any view posted here but I was thinking it should be acknowledged that Hamas is not out there to "relocate or destroy every
Israeli" but to do exactly what is Israel trying to do - to survive as a Nation.

Article Thirty-One of the Charter states: "Under the wing of Islam, it is possible for the followers of the three religions—Islam, Christianity
and Judaism—to coexist in peace and quiet with each other."

Hamas co-founder Mahmoud Al-Zahar did not rule out the possibility of accepting a "temporary two-state solution"

Al-Zahar "did not rule out the possibility of having Jews, Muslims and Christians living under the sovereignty of an Islamic state"

In late 2006, Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas, said that if a Palestinian state was formed within the 1967 lines, Hamas was willing to
declare a truce that could last as long as 20 years, and stated that Hamas will never recognize the "usurper Zionist government"

In November 2008, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh re-stated that Hamas was willing to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, and offered
Israel a long-term truce "if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights"

On December 1, 2010, Ismail Haniyeh again repeated, "We accept a Palestinian state on the borders of 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital, the release
of Palestinian prisoners, and the resolution of the issue of refugees," and "Hamas will respect the results [of a referendum] regardless of whether
it differs with its ideology and principles."

Pastor states that those who quote the charter rather than more recent Hamas statements may be using the Charter as an excuse to ignore Hamas.

British diplomat and former British ambassador to the United Nations Sir Jeremy Greenstock stated in early 2009 that the Hamas charter was "drawn up
by a Hamas-linked imam some [twenty] years ago and has never been adopted since Hamas was elected as the Palestinian government in 2006"

the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims
that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has
changed its views with time.

Many people think that Israel is the bad guy and wants to wipe out the Palestinians. Further, some believe that Israel's strength is so great that
they have responsibility for peace in the area. Whether that's right or wrong, I'm not paying as much attention to that here.

Palestine and Israel are both afraid. Scared people make poor decisions. I was assuming that Israel is afraid of being ended as a nation state. If
that is true, how do we ease Israel's fear?

I'm not sure what the Palestinians' fear is. Israel pulled all of the Jews out of Gaza, their population is growing, and while they are suffering
under Israel's attacks, Israel could have easily killed many more. But, I wanted to start on Israel's fears.

The quotes you provide seem to say that Israel would not be allowed to survive as a Jewish state for more than 20 years, tops. I don't think Israel
would accept that. Off the top of my head, I can't think of why Israel would want to agree to a surrender that would be completed in a relatively
short period of time.

United Nation’s figures as of July 22 indicate that at least 443 Palestinian civilians have died since fighting began on July 7. More than 147
children and 74 women are reported among the dead; 1,100 children and 1,153 women have been wounded, and an unknown number of other civilians. UN
facilities are already overflowing with tens of thousands of displaced persons.

Israeli air attacks in Gaza investigated by Human Rights Watch have been targeting apparent civilian structures and killing civilians in violation
of the laws of war. Israel should end unlawful attacks that do not target military objectives and may be intended as collective punishment or broadly
to destroy civilian property. Deliberate or reckless attacks violating the laws of war are war crimes, Human Rights Watch said.

Israel’s military operations in the West Bank following the abduction and killing of three Israeli teenagers have amounted to collective punishment.
The military operations included unlawful use of force, arbitrary arrests, and illegal home demolitions. During raids on Palestinian towns,
refugee camps, and villages, Israeli forces have shot and killed at least five Palestinians and arrested and detained at least 150 more without
charge.

Israeli security forces ordered a Palestinian man to take down security cameras that captured the shooting deaths of two Palestinian boys in May.

Video footage, photographs, witness statements, and medical records indicate that two 17-year-old boys whom Israeli forces shot and killed on May 15,
2014 posed no imminent threat to the forces at the time. The boys, who had been participating in a demonstration in the West Bank, were apparently
shot with live ammunition, Human Rights Watch said.

The Israeli military should immediately stop shooting at Palestinian civilians inside Gaza. Israeli military forces have killed 4 and wounded more
than 60 civilians near the perimeter fence with Gaza since the beginning of 2014, according to UN figures. There have been no reports of armed
Palestinian fighters killed in the same areas.

Unfortunately, we're drifting from the point here. That happens in a lot of threads and I'd rather it not happen here. The question on the floor
is "How can Israel guarantee it's safety and continued existence, with more than a Hamas promise to secure it?"

The secondary question is "If Hamas continues to fight against Israel and refuses peace terms, what should Israel's response be?"

"How can Israel guarantee it's safety and continued existence, with more than a Hamas promise to secure it?"

The secondary question is "If Hamas continues to fight against Israel and refuses peace terms, what should Israel's response be?"

With respect,
Charles1952

I truly believe all the quotes from Humans Right Watch and all the UN resolution and all the video, photo and other material available are there to
point to every living human what should be done FIRST to achieve peace.

and I truly believe that it the way "Israel can guarantee it's safety and continued existence" in the long term.

the secondary question is IF...

here are some facts for you, you can check it using any source even I believe you probably already know all of it:

Israel’s military operations in the West Bank following the abduction and killing of three Israeli teenagers have amounted to collective punishment.
The military operations included unlawful use of force, arbitrary arrests, and illegal home demolitions. During raids on Palestinian towns, refugee
camps, and villages, Israeli forces have shot and killed at least five Palestinians and arrested and detained at least 150 more without charge.

Citing Palestinian sources and experts in the field, Frenkel reported that kidnappings of three Israeli teens make no sense for Hamas. All these
reporters said that Hamas was in the process of government building and this time was not appropriate for such act, however, no one else in Western
world believed at that time because Israeli PM had said that they had proofs.

However, now they claim that even Israeli officials have admitted that these killings were not an act of Hamas.

and after "unlawful use of force, arbitrary arrests, and illegal home demolitions"... and after they "killed at least five Palestinians and
arrested and detained at least 150 more without charge" we saw Hamas firing rockets on Israel - no casualties.

and everything was ready for escalation:

On the night of 6 July, an Israeli strike killed seven Hamas militants. In response, Hamas' militants increased rocket attacks on Israel. By 7
July, Hamas militants had fired 100 rockets from Gaza at Israeli territory and the Israeli Air Force had bombed several sites in Gaza. Early on 8 July
Israeli Air Force bombed 50 targets in the Gaza Strip.

My writing must be worse than I thought. Let me take it from another angle.

Picture the chief Israeli negotiator getting his instructions. He is told there are two absolute "must haves" if there is going to be peace. One,
is that Palestine has to close up the tunnels used to send soldiers into Israel, and stop firing the rockets. Two, is that Israel has to remain it's
own country, under Israeli laws.

The negotiator says that those are reasonable, every country wants it's sovereignty respected and not be under constant attack. He then asks what he
can tell Palestine that Israel will offer. He is told that Israel will agree to a permanent cease-fire, allowing for Palestine to be free of Israeli
attacks, as long as they don't attack first.

There will also be no Israeli patrols into the strip during the cease fire, he can also offer electrical power for the strip.

I see you didn't mention West Bank; don't you think it's unrealistic for Israel to offer "no Israeli patrols" and much more what is needed as a
condition since there are numerous (illegal) settlements built on Palestinian land that are surrounded by Palestinian land???

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.